• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Big news coming from Sound United in 2023!

The x4800h is the one that doesn't make since anymore, now that the x3800h has 4 subs out, and Auro 3D. Just looking at the back panel compared to the x3800h, it offers one more HDMI giving it 7 instead of 6 HDMI inputs, it has a extra zone of audio giving it 3 zones for a whole home audio system, 3 triggers outs instead of 1, legacy component and composite video in, and 125w 2 channels driven vs 105w, that's basically a 1db difference in sound output.

x3800h
View attachment 233435

x4800h
View attachment 233436

Based on these helpful pictures, the 4800H's max. power consumption is rated at 710 W compared to 660 W for the 3800H, so only a 50 W difference, although the former's channels are rated at 125 W vs. 105 W for the latter. Based on the sister Marantz Cinema AVR specs, these models will likely consume 100 W when idle. (I plan to measure and report that power consumption after my 3800H arrives tomorrow, and especially vs. the number of internal power amps "switched off," which I suspect means only the disconnection of the signals from the pre-pro, rather than the actual reduction/elimination of Class A/B bias in the output stages.)

Assuming that the "70% guarantee" still applies to these new Denon's models (same as it applies to the new Marantz Cinema AVRs), the actual total power with 5 channels driven will be 5*125*0.7 = 438 W for the 4800H and 5*105*0.7 = 368 W for the 3800H. Assuming that about half of the 100 W idle power goes to the pre-pro and the other half to the power amp, the 3800H's efficiency would be 368 / (660 - 50) = 60%, which is in the ballpark of what Class A/B amps can muster. For the 4800H, that would be 438 / (710 - 50) = 66%, which is perhaps a bit of a stretch (even though, I believe, the 4800H is supposed to have a beefier transformer and maybe bigger block caps).
 
Last edited:
The slide pack linked above has details of the transformers and caps too.

Edit: Uploaded here for convenience...
Screenshot_20220926-231658_Firefox.jpg


Screenshot_20220926-231721_Firefox.jpg
 
Last edited:
Based on these helpful pictures, the 4800H's max. power consumption is rated at 710 W compared to 660 W for the 3800H, so only a 50 W difference, although the former's channels are rated at 125 W vs. 105 W for the latter. Based on the sister Marantz Cinema AVR specs, these models will likely consume 100 W when idle. (I plan to measure and report that power consumption after my 3800H arrives tomorrow, and especially vs. the number of internal power amps "switched off," which I suspect means only the disconnection of the signals from the pre-pro, rather than the actual reduction/elimination of Class A/B bias in the output stages.)

Assuming that the "70% guarantee" still applies to these new Denon's models (same as it applies to the new Marantz Cinema AVRs), the actual total power with 5 channels driven will be 5*125*0.7 = 438 W for the 4800H and 5*105*0.7 = 368 W for the 3800H. Assuming that about half of the 100 W idle power goes to the pre-pro and the other half to the power amp, the 3800H's efficiency would be (368 + 50) / 660 = 63%, which is in the ballpark of Class A/B amps can muster. For the 4800H, that would be (438 + 50) / 710 = 69%, which is perhaps a bit of a stretch (even though, I believe, the 4800H is supposed to have a beefier transformer and maybe bigger block caps).


That Power consumption number on the back of the AVR has to do with its ETL Certification, not the max power consumption. The actual max power consumption for one of these AVR's will be way above that number on the back panel probably be more like 1100w at full power for the 4800 and 900w full power for the 3800. either way the 20w difference between the 3800 and 4800 is negligible since you need a doubling of power to get 3db extra output in volume. If the 4800 put out say 200w a channel then I'd say its worth it, but your just not going to notice that extra 20w of power.

 
  • Like
Reactions: lc6




I really don't understand why anyone would buy a Marantz AVR over a Denon AVR, its the same thing for 1/3 more money.
 
If they're essentially the same, I prefer the look of the Marantz significantly over the Denon. Not $800 significantly mind you :oops:
 
I wish Denon would sell a pre processor. That has been a factor driving separate folks to Marantz. I hope Marantz also has a lower cost pre processor model in the works, $7k for the AV10 is a good jump over the outgoing $5499 AV8805A and $3199 AV7705. Guess I'll stick with the Denon 3700 for a bit as a pre and watch.
 
The x4800h is the one that doesn't make since anymore, now that the x3800h has 4 subs out, and Auro 3D. Just looking at the back panel compared to the x3800h, it offers one more HDMI giving it 7 instead of 6 HDMI inputs, it has a extra zone of audio giving it 3 zones for a whole home audio system, 3 triggers outs instead of 1, legacy component and composite video in, and 125w 2 channels driven vs 105w, that's basically a 1db difference in sound output.

x3800h
View attachment 233435

x4800h
View attachment 233436
Don't forget also that the x4xxx range gets you the 2-line display, front panel door, (much) upgraded remote, other bells and whistles. You also used to get a front HDMI port, and I'm really disappointed to see that disappear. I use it constantly with my PC.

Also it looks like the internal design of the X4800H diverges from the X3000 series now, whereas they used to be more similar. Seems that's thanks to a new "monolithic amplifier" design.
 
Last edited:
It looks like Denon took the "bigger better stronger" approach with the new A1H flagship.
More roids plus GH. I don't see how for this price they could implement decent 15 class D amplifiers. Old and proven design, nothing new here. I hope Denon makes me eat my words but I doubt it.

Edit: I wish I clicked and fully checked out the provided link before typing this. LOL
As noted before, nothing new as far as internal amps.

1664252963262.png
 
Last edited:
Depends. You could delay the impulse in time, sure. But there are many other things you can do.


Indeed they have. What they don't let on is that it's not possible to correct frequency response without changing the impulse, which of course their competitors do as well.

If you read Toole, frequency response is the result of a fourier transform of the impulse. You can go between the two simply with math. In other words, they are two sides of the same coin.


It's all going to come down to implementation. I have questions about how Dirac would work on a D+M AVR considering the fact that Dirac doesn't do levels and delays for you, doesn't calibrate to THX reference level, and doesn't suggest or even consider subwoofer crossovers. All of that will be on the user unless there is a custom solution created to guide you through it.
Yes - adjusting frequency response can be done using minimum phase (same as for analogue EQ components) which also adjust timing (phase)... or Linear Phase - where the timing and the F/R are seperated (and can be adjusted seperately)

If the system being corrected is a minimum phase one, then adjusting the F/R will correct the timing as well - (very handy for systems that are primarily or exclusively minimum phase! eg: Vinyl Cartridges...) - but if it is substantively mixed phase then all bets are off - much harder to model and therefore correct - presumably that is the area where the proprietary magic happens!
 
I wish Denon would sell a pre processor. That has been a factor driving separate folks to Marantz. I hope Marantz also has a lower cost pre processor model in the works, $7k for the AV10 is a good jump over the outgoing $5499 AV8805A and $3199 AV7705. Guess I'll stick with the Denon 3700 for a bit as a pre and watch.

The fact you can turn off the internal amps and they have pre outs makes it one for all intents and purposes.

If they released a separate it would be twice the price.
 
You also used to get a front HDMI port, and I'm really disappointed to see that disappear. I use it constantly with my PC.
Agreed, the removal of this from the entire lineup really sucks. Not even the A1H has it...
 
New "monolithic amplifier" design of X4800H, similar to the A1H. X3800H retains the current design.

View attachment 233490

View attachment 233491
View attachment 233492
It will be interesting to get measurements comparing X3 to X4..... I'm guessing - but would not be surprised if the X4 used the same amp boards as the A1H - just fewer of them, and a smaller power supply....
In terms of manufacturing efficiencies it would make sense! - so all Shirakawa based AVR's would have a particular commonality of parts.
 
I would not expect much from SU in the way of Dirac instructions. It seems much more likely that they will direct all such inquiry to other sources as Dirac will not even function from the receiver/processor (as Audyssey does) rather it is operated from your own computer. (I haven't played with the PC version of Audyssey and likely won't... does SU give instruction on using that software or do they direct users to Audyssey for more specific instruction?)
More to the point is whether you will be able to store multiple Dirac filters on the AVR/AVP to quickly switch between profiles (i.e. a flat profile for 2-channel music vs a house curve with boosted bass for HT...) or if you will have to upload each file to the machine as you want it. (Didn't the last gen of D&M machines allow for two separate Aud calibrations to be stored on board?)
Regardless, it will likely be that the Dirac thread at AVS starts seeing a bunch more traffic once the update to these new machines goes live sometime next year.

SU now own AVR Audyssey exclusively - so not clear whether support is via SU (D&M) or Audyssey...

Dirac implementations usually have at least 3 slots for differing configurations, people have requested more slots, but for most people 3 is plenty.
 
Interesting!

Looks like AKM lost a customer...

Interesting that the X3 misses out on the Jitter reducing clock regenerator (CS2100) - it is yet to be seen, in measurements whether the result is noticeable!
I'm not convinced it was, as between the X3700 and X6700... there was a less than 3db difference between them when tested ...

Perhaps they will succeed in differentiating the X3 from the X4 in this area more effectively than the current generation?

Also the CS49844A DSP used in the X2800 - is the same DSP as used on the Onkyo RZ50 I believe... where it manages to run Dirac Live....

So the X38 and up have substantially more powerful DSP's than needed for todays standard Dirac Live full range implementations.... CPU power intended for?
 
This is true but I would prefer XLR pre outs rather than RCA.
That will be a big $$$ item...

I presume that you will need to step up to A1 level prepro (from either D or M) to get XLR outs...

All for questionable actual audible benefits.... (under most normal circumstances... if you suffer from ground loops... huge benefits!!!)
 
Back
Top Bottom